Forum:Evolving the Perspectives section
=How can we best utilize & evolve the "Perspectives" section?= Many pages on Campaigns Wikia have started utilizing a Perspectives section where individuals can share their own perspectives on an issue. This is a new idea, unique to Campaigns, and we don't know yet how best to use these sections. As with everything "wiki," they will evolve PERFECTLY with everyone's thoughtful input. Let's use this space to discuss ideas, try new things, and find the best way to integrate these valuable Perspectives with the rest of the site content. ~ Nick D., San Diego, CA Discussion :What about "What's YOUR perspective?" category in articles? Does it belong there, or the talk page? -- Blackdog 04:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC) :These "Perspectives" sections, currently found in Environmental protection, Social Security, and Same-sex marriage among many others, do not fit the NPOV principle, but I don't think that they fit well in Talk either, because while they may be "too fluid" for the article, I think that with their "post once, do not reply" format, they're not "fluid enough" for a discussion section. Plus, I've always been under the impression that talk sections were for discussion of changes to the corresponding article (with sections being deleted once issues were resolved and the article was changed appropriately), not for opinions on the subject of the article. If this understanding is accurate, the perspective sections should either be left in the articles or deleted outright. --Whosawhatsis 03:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC) ::Or perhaps turned into summaries or polished presentations of well-known positions? Certainly, in article space, I think these make little sense as they stand.--Jimbo Wales 03:59, 9 July 2006 (UTC) :::They're really designed specifically to convey individuals' perspectives on an issue, and not to present information to be refined into material appropriate to the main article space, and as such would just clog up discussion pages if moved there. Another idea is presented on the Marijuana page, with a link to a separate article page for perspectives. The idea of a separate page is intriguing, and I think the ideal solutions would be a third tab next to "article" and "discussion" for "perspectives", but that might require modification to the software. --Whosawhatsis 04:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC) ::::What's wrong with having them in discussion pages? I agree that they don't have a place in main article, they are redundant and make the page messy. -- Blackdog 04:26, 9 July 2006 (UTC) :::::They're not discussion, they're comments. They're not fluid enough for the discussion pages. Just because they're signed (or supposed to be) and not NPOV, doesn't mean that they fit the discussion page any better than the article page. --Whosawhatsis 04:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC) ::::::Maybe they belong in the forum? --Jimbo Wales 12:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC) :::::::Hi guys... I'm the sneaky bastard that put the Perspectives up in the first place. I'm appreciating all the conversation around their place & value, and I am trusting that they will evolve with the rest of the site. For what it's worth, I like the idea of having them on a separate page a la the Marijuana page. That wasn't my idea but kudos to whoever did it! I feel like these DO have an important function separate from articles & discussion, because I'm amazed at how many people have both contributed AND added this section to new pages. Don't know if the "third tab" idea is possible, but that would be great. I do think that after a while there will be too many Perspectives for it to be efficient to read all of them, but I think something will evolve to manage them. A rating system to keep perspectives that people agree with? A weekly or monthly "sweep" so that only recent perspectives are posted? I don't know what it is, but that's the beauty of wiki... it will evolve perfectly. Thanks for all you guys do! 75.28.3.176 18:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)